Originally Posted by
scibuff
Your analogy is completely incorrect and even I would wipe the floor with you in a court room!
It would be the same if someone from AMS ***accessed*** the MAD terminal through regular means, i.e. the MAD terminal was meant to be accessible by everyone, and was denied because he/she is dutch. In other words, merchants are not obliged to offer the same products or services to everyone, but if they do, they cannot discriminate based on customers nationality/residency/billing address etc. Anyone from EU (or anywhere else for that matter) can change their country to Denmark (for various reasons), i.e. there is no ip reserve lookup check, and United.com is actually meant to allow customers to choose their point of sale. Once you do that, you cannot discriminate EU customers.
The problem with that argument, simply speaking, is that you are assuming that a non-discrimination rule guarantees you equal access to gross mistakes, as opposed to equal access to the actual intended price of a product.
(EDIT: the second problem is that the remedy for this was to complain to the EU, not to change the billing address to Denmark or the currency selection to DKK. Anyone could have made a formal complaint that this fare was not being offered to anyone other than Danes. Why didn't people do that instead of changing billing address or currency selection? I wonder....
)
I highly doubt that anyone in the relevant regulatory agencies is going to see the issue the way you see it. But I wish you luck nonetheless.